Advertisement
Central Surgical Association| Volume 128, ISSUE 4, P738-743, October 2000

Download started.

Ok

Mild ductal atypia after large-core needle biopsy of the breast: Is surgical excision always necessary?

      Abstract

      Background. The aim of the current study was to identify a select group of patients with mild atypia who do not need surgical excision after large-core needle biopsy (LCNB) of the breast. Methods. Nineteen (70%) of 27 patients with ductal atypia found on LCNB had subsequent surgical excision. These 19 patients were retrospectively assigned to 3 groups according to the severity of the atypia found, which was compared with the final pathologic specimen after surgical biopsy. Results. Cancer was identified through surgical biopsy in 6 (32%) of 19 patients. The severity of atypia seen on the LCNB specimen strongly correlated with subsequent cancer identification (P <.01). Two (33%) of 6 patients in group 2 (true atypical ductal hyperplasia [ADH]) and 4 (80%) of 5 patients in group 3 (severe ADH, borderline ductal carcinoma in situ) had cancer after surgical biopsy. No cancer was found after surgical biopsy in 8 patients in group 1 (mild atypia, not meeting criteria for ADH). Conclusions. The results of this study suggest that surgical excision can be avoided after LCNB of the breast in patients with only mildly atypical lesions that do not meet criteria for ADH. Patients with true ADH should continue to have surgical excision. (Surgery 2000;128:738-43.)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Page DL
        • Rogers LW.
        Combined histologic and cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of mammary atypical ductal hyperplasia.
        Hum Pathol. 1992; 23: 1095-1097
        • Marshall LM
        • Hunter DJ
        • Connolly JL
        • Schnitt SJ
        • Byrne C
        • London SJ
        • et al.
        Risk of breast cancer associated with atypical ductal hyperplasia of lobular and ductal types.
        Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1997; 6: 297-301
        • Dupont WD
        • Page DL.
        Risk factors for breast cancer in women with proliferative breast disease.
        N Engl J Med. 1985; 312: 146-151
        • Moore MM
        • Hargett III, CW
        • Hanks JB
        • Fajardo LL
        • Harvey JA
        • Frierson Jr, HF
        • et al.
        Association of breast cancer with the finding of atypical ductal hyperplasia at core breast biopsy.
        Ann Surg. 1997; 225: 726-733
        • Gadzala DE
        • Cederboom GJ
        • Bolton JS
        • McKinnon WM
        • Farr Jr, GH
        • Champaign J
        • et al.
        Appropriate management of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed by stereotactic core needle breast biopsy.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 1997; 4: 283-286
        • Burbank F.
        Stereotactic breast biopsy of atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ lesions: improved accuracy with directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy.
        Radiology. 1997; 202: 843-847
        • Jackman RJ
        • Burbank F
        • Parker SH
        • Evans III, WP
        • Lechner MC
        • Richardson TR
        • et al.
        Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic breast biopsy: improved reliability with 14-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy.
        Radiology. 1997; 204: 485-488
        • Lin PH
        • Clyde JC
        • Bates DM
        • Garcia JM
        • Matsumoto GH
        • Girvin GW.
        Accuracy of stereotactic core-needle breast biopsy in atypical ductal hyperplasia.
        Am J Surg. 1998; 175: 380-382
        • Brown TA
        • Wall JW
        • Christensen ED
        • Smith DV
        • Holt CA
        • Carter PL
        • et al.
        Atypical hyperplasia in the era of stereotactic core needle biopsy.
        J Surg Oncol. 1998; 67: 168-173
        • Liberman L
        • Smolkin JH
        • Dershaw DD
        • Morris EA
        • Abramson AF
        • Rosen PP.
        Calcification retrieval at stereotactic, 11-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy.
        Radiology. 1998; 208: 251-260
        • Brem RF
        • Behrndt VS
        • Sanow L
        • Gatewood OM.
        Atypical ductal hyperplasia: histologic underestimation of carcinoma harvested from impalpable breast lesions using 11-gauge stereotactically guided directional vacuum-assisted biopsy.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999; 172: 1405-1407
        • Rosai J.
        Borderline epithelial lesions of the breast.
        Am J Surg Pathol. 1991; 15: 209-221
        • Schnitt SJ
        • Connolly JL
        • Tavassoli FA
        • Fechner RE
        • Kempson RL
        • Gelman R
        • et al.
        Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions using standardized criteria.
        Am J Surg Pathol. 1992; 16: 1133-1143
        • Burbank F.
        Stereotactic breast biopsy: comparison of 14- and 11-gauge Mammotome probe performance and complication rates.
        Am Surg. 1997; 63: 988-995